Cognitive-behavior therapy for depressed cancer patients in a medical care setting

Major depression is the most common psychiatric disorder among cancer patients and is associated with decreased quality of life, significant deterioration in recreational and physical activities, relationship difficulties, sleep problems, more rapidly progressing cancer symptoms, and more metastasis and pain relative to nondepressed cancer patients. Although some research has explored the utility of psychological interventions with cancer patients, only one study to date has explored the potential benefits of cognitive-behavior therapy among cancer patients with well-diagnosed depression. Addressing this gap in the literature, this study represents an open clinical trial to assess the effectiveness of a brief Cognitive-Behavioral Treatment for Depression (CBTD) among depressed cancer patients in a medical care setting. Results revealed strong treatment integrity, good patient compliance, excellent patient satisfaction with the CBTD protocol, and significant pre-post treatment gains across a breadth of outcome measures assessing depression, anxiety, quality of life, and medical outcomes. These gains also were associated with strong effect sizes and generally maintained at 3-month follow-up. Behavioral activation interventions, especially when paired with cognitive techniques, may represent a practical medical care treatment that may improve psychological outcomes and quality of life among cancer patients. Study limitations and future research directions are discussed.     

Brain Recording,Mind-Reading,and Neurotechnology: Ethical Issues from Consumer Devices to Brain-Based Speech Decoding

Science and Engineering Ethics - Brain reading technologies are rapidly being developed in a number of neuroscience fields. These technologies can record, process, and decode neural signals. This...     

Within-Person Variability in Goal Content and Goal Frame: Amount,Patterns, Antecedents,and Consequences of Variation in Goal Orientation Over Time

Several studies have examined goal fluctuation over time, focusing on variability in goal level. This study investigated within-person variation in goal content and goal frame. Drawing from Motivated Action Theory (DeShon & Gillespie, 2005 DeShon, R. P. and Gillespie, J. Z. 2005. A motivated action theory account of goal orientation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90: 1096–1127. [Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]) we examined variability in goal orientation over time in terms of amount, patterns, antecedents, and consequences. Participants completed a dispositional goal orientation measure and then daily surveys assessing perceptions, behavior, and goal orientation prior to a single performance episode. Results indicated there was substantial within-person variability, there were patterns in this variability involving goal-related behaviors and dispositional goal orientation, and certain patterns predicted exam performance. These findings suggest it may be useful to focus on not only goal level but also goal content and goal frames in future goal regulation research.     

The influence of perceived accountability and outcome interdependence on goals and effort

Self‐regulatory processes are central to achievement contexts, as individuals spend much of their time in these situations pursuing goals. This study investigated the effects of accountability and outcome interdependence on goal and effort regulation over time. Participants completed five task trials, reporting goals and intended effort prior to each trial and receiving performance feedback after each trial. Hierarchical linear modeling analyses indicated that there was a positive within‐person relationship between performance and subsequent goals. More importantly, findings indicated that the performance–goal relationship was moderated by accountability and the performance–effort relationship was moderated by outcome interdependence. These results reveal that the goal and effort regulation patterns observed in prior studies are influenced by common social contextual factors, leading to different patterns of self‐regulation.